EAC & dBpoweramp Users – Which do you use/prefer & why?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Batears52, Jan 6, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Batears52

    Batears52 Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Near Baltimore, MD
    I’ve been pondering this thread for a while now – not sure if I should “go there” – and finally decided that it’s important enough to me to ask.

    First off, this is for folks who are using either EAC or dBpoweramp as their primary software for lossless CD ripping. If you are using iTunes or another program & it works for you, that’s great! But I’ve pretty much settled on FLAC as the format I want to use for lossless – and these 2 programs seem to be the most popular.

    Secondly, PLEASE don’t go too tech-y on me – I just know I’ll get lost! (I can follow set-up directions for EAC, but sometimes don’t completely understand the “tech” behind them.)

    So why am I asking - where does this all come from? Well, a number of years ago – when I first decided I wanted to rip my CDs, my reason was pretty simple. I had all this music at home & an hour commute each way to work. The radio wasn’t doing it for me anymore, so I bought an iPod so I could play my music in the car.

    Back then, you didn’t hear a whole lot about lossless. It seemed like the 2 most popular programs were iTunes & EAC, and the big decision was whether you wanted to use MP3 or Apple’s format. Then, as now, there were pros & cons for each application & format. I tried out both, and in the end, I decided to go with MP3 as my format, and I chose to use EAC to do the rips. I ripped a bunch of CDs at the “-V2” VBR setting – because that was what was recommended in most guides. (I later changed to “-V1” briefly and then went to “-V0”.)

    Well, we all know that lossless became more & more popular, hard drives got bigger and it dawned on me that sooner or later, I would want lossless versions of everything. So I started doing both: FLAC for a lossless archive and MP3 for the iPod. Honestly, I was actually ripping every CD twice! – that is, until I learned that you could convert the FLACs to MP3s. That’s basically what I bought dBpoweramp for initially – to help me fix basic information in the tags & do the file conversion. I was (am) still using EAC to do my FLAC rips.

    So now we’re up to the present. I’ve started & stopped the project of ripping my collection several times – too many times. I’d really like to try & get it done properly – in some sort of logical manner, if that’s at all possible! It’s a new year - 2012 - Wintertime – and that seems like a great time to get organized & started.

    I had been using EAC v0.95b4 for a while, when I decided to see if there was a new version available. I downloaded EAC v1.0 Beta 2 & very shortly afterwards, Beta 3, which is the currently available version. I am running “dBpoweramp Music Converter Registered Power Pack Release 13.5” – and I know that there is a new version available. That’s when I started “thinking” – and that’s not always a good thing with me, because I tend to “over-think” this stuff!

    From what I am seeing right now, the 2 most popular apps for ripping FLAC files are EAC & dBpoweramp. Just like before, both have their pros & cons. So basically, before I start this project up again, I wanted to "clear the table" and really think about my software choice before I jump in. I’m asking myself: “should I make a switch to dBpoweramp to do all my rips or stick with EAC?” This is why I started a new thread. So I'm asking...

    1) Which program are you using for creating your FLAC files and why do you prefer it?

    2) What do you feel are the main differences between EAC & dBpoweramp – as far as the way they work – the way they do what they do?

    Thank you!!
  2. Vocalpoint

    Vocalpoint Forum Resident


    I have been ripping and cataloging for a long while now and use a variety of tools to maintain the library. First and foremost is FLAC conversion - I use dbPowerAmp for everything. EAC has never been installed here.

    My reasoning for this is twofold - firstly - dbPowerAmp is professional level software being actively developed by a company who is into high quality audio (Illustrate). Probably the best 25 bucks I have ever spent. The dbPowerAmp Reference suite has everything you could ever need.

    Secondly - dbPowerAmp is easy to work with and well laid out. One of the huge knocks on EAC is it's layout, settings windows etc. Not that one couldn't get it going with about a half hour of tweaking. I just found it clunky. Also after one version seemed to be shipping malware along for the ride - I dumped it completely.

    I also rip via my player (J.River Media Center) for some things and I also have EZ-CD Extractor here as well - it sees a lot of work when it comes to conversion. It's an excellent ripper as well. Finally I would also recommend Trader's Little Helper as a must have in you toolkit as well. It comes in handy for all sorts of FLAC stuff.

    As far as your rip project goes - I would gently suggest that you select your tool and stick with it. Convert everything to FLAC, tag all your files as you see fit and consider that your master archive copy. Take a copy for your play library and then make two backup copies of the complete library (one preferably offsite).

    That should make you good to go for now and the future - no matter what format comes along - you can convert from your master archive copy to MP3 or aac or ALAC or whatever is the format de jour :)

    Happy Rippin!


    MEMPHISSUN Forum Resident

    100% with the above post!.

    There is a thread on which is the best,on the ... Audio Hardware forum.
  4. timztunz

    timztunz Audioista

    dbPowerAmp.....powerful, simple and intuitive.
  5. utenteanonimo64

    utenteanonimo64 Well-Known Member

    EAC because I am a tight **** and does everything I need.
  6. boots

    boots Chokma!

    dbPoweramp invented Accurip software and always keeps their suite up to date. With their DSP plugin you can set it to rip HDCD's to 24/44 when they are inserted. DSP also has a boat load of other gadgets and you can use it to stream music to a wireless setup. You can also encode to a variety of formats with a simple right click.
  7. theanswer337

    theanswer337 Forum Resident

    I have used both and prefer dBpoweramp. The user interface is more user friendly (at least to me). I'm slightly obsessive about insuring all information is correct and include as much info. in my metadata as I can. Even down to including all matrix information. It's a time consuming, monotonous process, but if done right, you only need to do it once.

    I use secure ripping, utilizing AccurateRip. I rip everything as an AIFF file. I have ripped a couple thousand CD's with it and, at this point, can now do it in my sleep.

    With both programs, getting the initial set-up is the critical step. Once that is completed you can be assured of bit-accurate rips with either program.
  8. autodidact

    autodidact Forum Resident

    EAC. It is free. It works beautifully. What more do you want?

    You want FLAC, you say? Fine, but what about other formats? I use the old FREE version of XRecode to convert the EAC image file to FLAC.

    Why not buy dBPowerAmp and have it do FLAC conversion? Of course I could do that, but I don't always want to convert to FLAC. XRecode is like the Swiss Army Knife of format converters. .cue/WAV to FLAC, or to AAC, ALAC, MP3, WV, OGG, APE, WMA. It will convert about anything to anything. Since this I need this useful tool anyway, I will take the extra step to rip the image file (.cue/WAV) extracted with EAC to FLAC or other format.

    Of course if all you want to do is convert CDs to MP3 or FLAC or WAV, or you don't like an extra step in the process, then another option makes sense.
  9. MartinGr

    MartinGr Forum Resident

    I like EAC, when I have to rescue some CDs with a questionable quality.

    But for ripping my CD collection, dbPoweramp is the perfect tool!
    Most important for me is the PerfectMeta feature - which gets the best tagging results by comparing 4 or 5 (?) different online databases.
    FreeDB isn't enough, because it is important for me to tag the composers and get proper album art.

  10. This thread should be in the hardware section.
  11. ChristianL

    ChristianL Forum Resident

    Berlin, Germany
    I prefer EAC for ripping because I like image files with cue sheets and dbPowerAmp delivers individual tracks. dbPowerAmp is my favorite for converting, though.
  12. uncleroy

    uncleroy Forum Resident

    Am I mistaken that you can convert files to flac with EAC?
  13. Nobby

    Nobby Forum Resident

    Birmingham, UK
    I sometimes use EAC, but invariably use Plextools (as I have an old Plextor drive).

    Plextools tells me exactly how many sample errors I have, which is usually none!
  14. TheSunIsChicken

    TheSunIsChicken formerly Merseybeat

    ONLY EAC won't touch anything else.
  15. Vocalpoint

    Vocalpoint Forum Resident

    What does this mean?
  16. SamS

    SamS Forum Legend

    I use EAC mainly, but also have the paid version of dB. I'll use dB when EAC can't find the tag info.
  17. TheSunIsChicken

    TheSunIsChicken formerly Merseybeat

    It's the only one I trust. Tried DB and others and EAC is the only one I will use. If you know "where to look" EAC is the gold standard.
  18. serendipitydawg

    serendipitydawg Dag nabit!

    Berkshire UK
    I love free software.

    But EAC seems to be almost deliberately complex and user unfriendly.

    The modest sum dBpoweramp costs seems almost a bargain.

    And it is idiot proof as well!
  19. keef00

    keef00 Forum Resident

    I used EAC exclusively for a long while, but switched to dbPowerAmp because it would let me do more tasks and was much easier to use. With the wide range of plug-ins, you can do virtually anything with it. I tried a handful of other rippers/encoders/converters/players, but db is by far the winner for me. I still have EAC installed, and will occasionally try it if db has a problem ripping a disc.
  20. ricks

    ricks Custom Title:

    Hudson Yards
    I consider both essential. I do use EAC more often but the 1.0x versions have rubbed me the wrong way. I voted "Both".
  21. Lazlo Nibble

    Lazlo Nibble Forum Resident

    Denver, Colorado
    EAC, because Spoon apparently doesn't believe in cue sheets.
  22. jkauff

    jkauff Putin-funded Forum Troll

    Akron, OH
    I use both. I've been using EAC for years, but dbPoweramp is great for quick format conversions. EAC's secure ripping capabilities are the best for making copies of damaged CDs (and my car player has damaged more than a few in recent years--I only play CD-Rs now), and I value the CUE sheet capabilities. If I were just ripping CDs to FLAC, I'd probably use dbPoweramp more than EAC.
  23. Lownote30

    Lownote30 Bass Clef Addict

    Nashville, TN, USA
    I use EAC for ripping and dbpoweramp for converting when I need to. I don't rip with dbpoweramp though. EAC is better at it.
  24. SBurke

    SBurke Nostalgia Junkie

    Philadelphia, PA
    I use dBpoweramp exclusively. It is absolutely critical IMO when ripping a large classical collection because of PerfectMeta, which collects four different metadata options. My choice for metadata format is to name the performers as artists, and composer as composer, and the AMG metadata is essential to doing that efficiently, and it is only available through dBpoweramp, to my knowledge. It's also a very efficient ripper, quicker than EAC in my experience.

    I'm at a loss as to why anyone would say EAC is better at ripping. If you want cue sheets, I understand that. But an accurate rip is an accurate rip.
  25. superstar19

    superstar19 el Borracho caliente

    Canton, MI, USA
    Is there actual data/tests proving this? I use EAC exclusively to rip my CDs to FLAC, but based on this thread I'm considering looking in to dbpoweramp. I'm not fond of how EAC handles tagging and I do end up using MediaMonkey to manage the tags from time to time after I rip. MediaMonkey handles my library as well as any MP3 conversions that I need.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page